Community Coalitions As a Tool for Child Maltreatment Prevention

Background. While many agencies focus on implementing prevention strategies at the individual or family level, few are able to tackle prevention at the larger community or societal levels. Texas increased child maltreatment prevention efforts in 2014 by funding services in eight counties with the highest rates of child maltreatment. All sites were required to build or engage in a community collaboration to enhance public and private collaboration to prevent child maltreatment. 

Methods. A mixed-methods program evaluation included semi-structured individual interviews with local coalition members (n=42). Qualitative data were analyzed using conventional content analysis. Additionally, quantitative data were collected through online surveys of agency staff and community members. The coalition survey was completed by coalition members in each of the eight counties (n=242).  The surveys included validated measures such as the Wilder Collaboration Index, as well as study-developed measures related to community prevention needs. The Wilder Collaboration Index is a 40-item scale made up of 19 Factors. Factor scores of 4.0 or higher show strength in the coalition, scores between 3.0 and 3.9 are borderline and may require attention, while scores of 2.9 or lower indicate concern.

Results. Participants had high scores on the Wilder collaboration survey suggesting that the coalitions were functioning well. Based on survey responses, all coalitions are functioning very well, with 13 out of 19 factors scoring a 4.0 or higher, and the remaining six factors scoring in the range of 3.5-3.9. The factor with the lowest score (3.54) assessed whether the coalition had sufficient funds, staff, materials, and time. The next lowest score of 3.83 was for the factor measuring whether the coalition had developed clear roles and policy guidelines. Areas needing improvement were additional funding and clearer community roles. Non-profits, child protective services (CPS) and schools were the top three sectors most engaged in the coalitions. The business community, parents, and child care facilities were the top three sectors that were missing from the community conversation about child maltreatment prevention.  No community previously had a coalition specifically addressing child maltreatment, but most had an early childhood coalition where a specific child maltreatment workgroup was created. In terms of child maltreatment in their community, participants noted that there were complex factors driving child maltreatment including substance use, mental health, family violence, teen parenthood and lack of quality child care.  These issues were also noted in both the survey and coalition focus groups as needs that were not being met by agencies in their community.

Conclusions. Findings from this evaluation suggest that community-developed strategies are important in bringing together individuals to focus on child maltreatment.  However, the top factors driving child maltreatment in each community were not being addressed.  In both qualitative and quantitative data, coalition members identified substance use, mental health and family violence as driving factors in child maltreatment.  However, no community attempted to develop programs to address these factors as they instead focused on meeting the criteria of using evidence based programs, specifically home visiting programs.